ABSTRACT
Although breast conservation surgery (BCS) is commonly performed, several aspects of the procedure remain controversial. We undertook a cross-sectional survey to compare Canadian (CDN) and American (AM) general surgeons' reported BCS practice patterns to better understand the cross-border differences in early-stage breast cancer surgery care. A modified Dillman Method survey was mailed to 1,447 AM and 1,443 CDN surgeons. Factors evaluated included preoperative assessment, margin definition, surgical techniques, and re-excision practices. The response rate was 26% and 51% for AM and CDN surgeons, respectively. There was variation in use of preoperative core biopsies. American surgeons required wider margins for invasive cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ, and more often recommend re-excision for invasive cancer with 1 and 2 mm margins (p < 0.05). There was also variability in surgical techniques used for intraoperative margin assessment. Wide variation in BCS practice was observed, with some of this variability related to surgeon country.
Subject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Mastectomy, Segmental/statistics & numerical data , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Canada , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/surgery , Cross-Sectional Studies , Data Collection , Decision Support Techniques , Female , Humans , Male , United StatesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: We surveyed Canadian General Surgeons to examine decision-making in early stage breast cancer. METHODS: A modified Dillman Method was used for this mail survey of 1443 surgeons. Practice patterns and factors that influence management choices for: preoperative assessment, definition of margin status, surgical techniques and recommendations for re-excision were assessed. RESULTS: The response rate was 51% with 41% treating breast cancer. Most (80%) were community surgeons, with equal distribution of low/medium/high volume and years of practice categories. Approximately 25% of surgeons "sometimes or frequently" performed diagnostic excisional biopsies while 90% report "frequently" or "always" performing preoperative core biopsies. There was marked variation in defining negative and close margins, in the use of intra-operative margin assessment techniques and recommendations for re-excision. CONCLUSIONS: Responses revealed significant variation in attitudes and practices. These findings likely reflect an absence of consensus in the literature and potential gaps between best evidence and practice.
